Originally Posted By: skinneyOriginally Posted By: Kevinfarmer3456Originally Posted By: Cowboy43Originally Posted By: DoubleUpSome hunters feel they can justify the high cost of the Trijicons, others have enough wealth that they don't need to justify it, some others can use it as a business expense, and others just don't see their way clear to spend that kind of money. It's all good!
I'm glad there are people who can afford the high end and maybe even highest end equipment because it will eventually filter down to a price that more people can reasonably afford.
For me, I'm not going to shoot much past 300 yds. at night. I can do that with the Pulsar XQ50. Would it be nice to have a perfect image, whatever perfect is? Why sure, but the image I have now allows me to do all that I need at the distance I will shoot, and get a good enough recording of it that I can enjoy seeing what happened.
The original question was for something in the $3,000 to $3,500 range, and that can be done with the Pulsar Apex or Trail XQ line. i agree to some extent. But when a $1900 ATN Thor HD puts out better video quality than a $10,000 unit. Its just hard to really call a Trijicon a Superior unit.
I guess I can say this. The trijicon has a better core image while looking thru it than most others. But in other areas such as video and other items, it falls way behind. When you spend $10,000 and you still have to do this to get an acceptable video to promote yourself. I just find it funny. I mean who wants to spend that much money and have to aim by viewing thru your phone with a stock pack attached to the gun with wires running everywhere. Lol, not me!!!
75 Coyotes in a month using that set up... I could tell you the perks, but that's classified. LOL. i highly doubt your doing anything that hasnt already been done. Ive killed that many out of a helicopter in a few days. So nothing new on the numbers